I think these guidelines sound great as written for the current publicity team based on my understanding. Obviously the team needs to decide this. I'm writing more because there's something you said in your original message that I think we might want to revisit in the future. 1) You said that Debian would not have an official presence on a proprietary social network. I think that as a statement of current political reality that's probably true. I don't think there are any policy impediments to doing so though, and I note that even the FSF does have a twitter presence (with reservations). 2) You said that Debian should not have an official social presence on any social network. That statement is consistent with statements you've made over the years in the discussion of having Debian supported hardware and in the discussions recently of LTS funding. I think there are other opinions in the project, and I think some focused discussion around coming to consensus on that issue would benefit the project. That is exploring when we are willing to have official interactions with third-parties. You have valid concerns, but it's also true we miss significant opportunities by not having official interactions with third parties. I want to bring up these points because I think that we should not discourage people from having discussions around them in the future. Clearly for any social network presence to be official the publicity team would need to want that. I understand and support the current team's desire not to do that.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature